Which is Weber's Best?

[Parson]

I thought I would celebrate this new sub-forum by posing a question. Which of David Weber's books so far do you like the best?

Anyone who knows me, knows which one I think is the worst Flip Flop Genre
Which might actually belong on this sub-forum.

For me it is a really hard call. "In Fury Born" is certainly right up there. But among Weber's novels I think I have to go with "The Field of Dishonor." I was just sure that the ending of that novel was going to be horrific, and the pathos it generated for me was palpable.

How about you?

[Vertigo]

Wow congratulations to Mr Weber, his own sub-forum no less! (only just noticed, me!)

I'm really not good at comparing one book against another, especially if they are similar (eg same author). I always find they are so different that it is hard to make an absolute comparison.

However, my database is showing A Short Victorious War as being given top marks after I read it. I would qualify that by saying that I do not always later agree with my own ratings. Sometimes, especially if the book ends strongly or weakly, I come away with a better or worse impression than the book actually deserves.

In this case without consulting my database I suspect I would also have gone in favour of In Fury Born. My only problem with that is that at the end I seem to recall feeling that it wasn't fully complete. It seemed to suggest the start of a series that has never come.

My other contender might have been the first Safehold book, Off Armegeddon Reef. Whilst I do love the HH books I think the Safehold books have a bit more depth to them. But that might just be because I find the accelerated development of the technology fascinating to follow.

[Parson]

Vertigo I would entirely agree that In Fury Born cries out for multiple sequels and all we've seen is an expanded version. I would celebrate the day we have more of this story in print. A Short Victorious War is a serious candidate for the honor of best of "Honor".

I am closely following the Safehold series, but it does not turn my crank as much as those which are more "space" based. I long to see the Safeholdians jump into the 23rd century.

[Dave]

Originally Posted by Parson

Anyone who knows me, knows which one I think is the worst Flip Flop Genre
Which might actually belong on this sub-forum.

Thread moved to this forum.

[Vertigo]

I certainly enjoy good space opera but I don't think it's actually my favourite genre. I think from my reading I tend towards slightly more individualistic stuff. So I like books like Neal Asher's Polity books. More SF thriller I suppose. I'm not sure quite what it is about the Safehold books that grabs me. Certainly I like the developing technology aspect, as mentioned before, but I also enjoy the tactics he is using both to accelerate the technology and undermine the established wolrd order. And I think as a central character 'Merlin' stands up pretty well besides Honor.

I think I also particularly enjoy books that shuffle the genres up a bit. In this case the blend of science fiction and what is really fictional history (rather than historical fiction). I do love the blending of science and fantasy when it is done well.

[Parson]

Merlin does indeed make a superb hero figure. I would like it if Weber let him/her ruminate a bit more on what was lost and what was to gain. Also showing my prejudice I would like to see him/her longing to return to the stars.

[Vertigo]

Yes I think it is interesting to speculate on just how far he will take the series. I know that has been discussed before but I wouldn't like to bet he doesn't eventually take them off planet again. One of the advantages of the Merlin/Nimue character is that he can keep the series going for many generations and still keep one central character.

I think it's also interesting that Merlin/Nimue is not really the hero of the books. He/she is more of a catalyst to the real heroes.

[Parson]

Vertigo, That's a good point about Merlin/Nimue not being the real hero but the catalyst that ignites the possibility of the real heroes. At least that's our point of view. But I would say that from the point of the view of the characters they would likely see themselves doing their "duty" while they would see Merlin as the most important person in their fight with the "church."

[Vertigo]

Yes I think that's probably very true Parson, and you're right I was thinking very much from the perspective of driving the plot. I probably should have said main protagionist but then he could well be described as that. I'm not quite sure what the word is I'm looking for but I definitely see him as being more of a catalyst than the hero.

In fact, come to think of it, a catalyst is really what he tries to be as much as possible, taking as little direct action as he can get away with whilst still keeping his plans on target.

[Parson]

Originally Posted by Vertigo

In fact, come to think of it, a catalyst is really what he tries to be as much as possible, taking as little direct action as he can get away with whilst still keeping his plans on target.

Excellent insight! In that s/he is nearly godlike. (Working out his plan for the world through people who will undoubtedly choose poorly from time to time.) Maybe Merlin is more of an archangel than those who claimed it for themselves, Langhorne etc.

[Vertigo]

Mmm intersting thought that one Parson. And I think you are probably right! And it is quite likely deliberate on the part of Weber.

[Parson]

Parson is (how do the Brits say it?) chuffed! Once in a while the old brain still manages to sputter something insightful out.

[Vertigo]

Oooh verging on the slap territory there Parson. I have seen many an insightful comment from you!

However, chuffed would likely be a pretty good English description!

Edit: incidentally after all the rants I have seen over the last couple of years from numerous different people demanding Weber have his own sub-forum, I'm a little surprised at the lack of response to this particular thread. I would have thought there were a good many people around with a view on their favourite Weber books. Strange...

[Parson]

Sigh! Wanting and using are usually two very different things. One takes emotion and the other takes work. And we all know what's easier.

[Coragem]

For me, so far, it's The Honor of the Queen.

It has everything. I think Weber handles the issues surrounding religious fundamentalism very well. And, as ever, he is a master at showing how characters can be 'wrong' without being 'bad'. Also, a master at showing conflict between characters who, again, might not be 'good' or 'bad', but who have different perspectives. Finally, I love the way he's prepared to write characters who can be heroic, or prepared to accept responsibility.

It feels more tightly plotted than his other books, too. With later books I fear that his need for haste precludes his taking time to plan and handle plotting. Later Honor books seemed to meander, for me.

My recurring opinion of Weber is that he must be a true genius to write as well as he does and as fast as he does. I just wish he'd slow down, because imagine then what he'd be capable of!

Coragem.